Support NeoGAF

[Boss Doggie]

The video doesn't show those moves because it's trying to prove the mechanic exists in both cases. Moves that have little knockback of course are going to be less affected.

Because it would be more difficult to tell the difference on moves with less knockback?

That's the whole point of the video to begin with.

And that means damage racking is there. I'm not harping on the rage video for that, I'm harping on the interpretation of that video because people assume everything will have knockback.

So everyone's Lucario? And Lucario is SUPER Lucario? I can dig it.

what does that make MegaLucario? O:

Spoiler

Lucario gets damage boost too and I think better aura damage ratio, and iirc megaluke gets maxxed out instantly

 

[JediLink]

I don't understand why this is something that needs to be changed? Too long compared to what? Previous Smash games? When will people realize new games aren't trying to replicate older ones?

Too long compared to what is fun.

 

[RomanceDawn]

Of course, but Sakurai's a stubborn son of a bitch so I can't really see it happening.

Hahaha true that. Well as long as no character can be exploited like Metaknight, Diddy, Ice Climbers or Snake and as long as there is no immediate hit stun canceling and as long as there are no guaranteed or infinite chain grabs and as long as there is no tripping this game will undoubtedly be competitive in my hands for years to come.

I heard about the ZSS infinite, is it only on Robin? I fully expect that to get patched out. ZSS though was the character I feared most in Brawl. Mainly because of who I chose but that paralyzer is so hard for me to get around. I feel like she is going to be top tier for sure. Any tips on getting around her reach and specifically the paralyzer?

 

[Revven]

And that means damage racking is there. I'm not harping on the rage video for that, I'm harping on the interpretation of that video because people assume everything will have knockback.

Er, I'm not assuming that at all?... Who's making those assumptions? All you can definitively state from the video is that if Player 1 has 0% and Player 2 has 150%, Player 1 has less of a chance of KOing Player 2 with one of their stronger moves (like Mario's Usmash) compared to if they were at a higher percentage. Every move you do at like 100% will have more knockback, how much knockback depends on how much the move already has to begin with.

I don't know who's posts or comments you're reading...

 

[balladofwindfishes]

If games go too long for comfort, just reduce the stock count. Maybe the game is better balanced for 2 stocks instead of 3.

 

[Timeaisis]

I'm going to go on record and say that I agree with most of Sakurai's mechanic design decisions so far.

Not designing around competitive play does not imply bad game design. And good game design does not imply designing around competitive play. This is shaping up to be the most accessible, most intuitive, and most balanced Smash game yet, and I'm really excited to get my hands on it.

 

[Formless]

I think VI is good but the magnitude of its effect seems like way too much from the tests people have run.

 

[chaosblade]

I don't understand why this is something that needs to be changed? Too long compared to what? Previous Smash games? When will people realize new games aren't trying to replicate older ones? A difference is not something that needs to be fixed

And besides, people play Smash for HOURS. No one sits down and plays just one game, so why are games lasting longer a big deal for anything but a tournament setting?

I think that's the perspective a lot of people are talking about.

And even for me personally, playing at home, it's not really fun to engage in the rubber band game of repeated smashing opponent away -> they get close/recover -> smash opponent away -> repeat.

Either the blast zones or VI could be "fixed" though. The blast zones would be fine because it's not like there is anything to be gained having characters go out as far as they do. Off stage play is not going to get that far away from the stage unless floaty characters are involved, and they make up a small chunk of the roster.

 

[Boss Doggie]

Er, I'm not assuming that at all?... Who's making those assumptions? All you can definitively state from the video is that if Player 1 has 0% and Player 2 has 150%, Player 1 has less of a chance of KOing Player 2 with one of their stronger moves (like Mario's Usmash) compared to if they were at a higher percentage.

I don't know who's posts or comments you're reading...

What, why did you assume I was talking about you? There have been posters like in GFaqs saying that rage prevents combos due to high knockback, forgetting other attacks exist. My post was a blanket statement about complainers.

 

[Revven]

If games go too long for comfort, just reduce the stock count. Maybe the game is better balanced for 2 stocks instead of 3.

Well, yes, that's what some are leaning on. The "freak out" is from people who want to keep 3 stocks no matter what + the concern for whether spectators will like "drawn out" matches (and history shows they don't, see: Brawl). Spectators on live streams are what helped revive Melee and keep it super relevant, if those same people (or a group similarly large enough) don't find Smash 4 entertaining to watch then it will go to the wayside (which people don't want to happen, hence the concern and worry).

I don't know how many times I'm going to have to post that explanation but yeah, tournaments don't just keep going just because of the players it's also based on how good the game actually is to watch as well.

 

[Revven]

There have been posters like in GFaqs saying that rage prevents combos due to high knockback, forgetting other attacks exist.

Well, you just need to learn to ignore those people. They don't understand how the game works. They'll see when they have the game how rage doesn't really impact the combo game much, it just impacts when you'll be able to KO someone.

Edit: Aw shit, double post. Oh well.

 

[perfectchaos007]

30 mins until US demo releases?

 

[RomanceDawn]

What are the general thoughts on characters? Do any really stand out at the moment? Does any character just seem like yucky charms? When Brawl came out, Link, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf and a few others were immediately viewed as darn near useless. They aren't but boy did they have an uphill battle to win things.

I finally played my brother yesterday and for about 30-40 matches he beat me silly with MegaMan. He was just using that shield in ways that really disrupted me. I was very surprised.

 

[backlot]

I wish it was easier to test VI in any direction other than straight up or down. I'm betting gravity is probably skewing the results a bit.

 

[emb]

Too long compared to what is fun.

And even for me personally, playing at home, it's not really fun to engage in the rubber band game of repeated smashing opponent away -> they get close/recover -> smash opponent away -> repeat.

Yep and especially yep.

If games go too long for comfort, just reduce the stock count. Maybe the game is better balanced for 2 stocks instead of 3.

That can run tournaments on time, but the issue I have with it is the length of each stock slowing down the pace of the game. It can be one stock, but the game not flowing well could still be an issue.

(Not saying it's horrible here, just that it could be. I haven't played the full game.)

 

[Icelandic_Jazz]

siglemic is practicing with techs in Melee if you want to see the kind of depth and speed that Melee has.

I'm enjoying the Smash 4 demo so far and it's def going to be a ton better than Brawl competitively, but I hope it grows as complex as Melee in the long run, even if it plays very differently.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

I think that's the perspective a lot of people are talking about.

And even for me personally, playing at home, it's not really fun to engage in the rubber band game of repeated smashing opponent away -> they get close/recover -> smash opponent away -> repeat.

Either the blast zones or VI could be "fixed" though. The blast zones would be fine because it's not like there is anything to be gained having characters go out as far as they do. Off stage play is not going to get that far away from the stage unless floaty characters are involved, and they make up a small chunk of the roster.

Lower the stock then...there's so many ways to shorten/cap matches

 

[PadWarrior]

What are the general thoughts on characters? Do any really stand out at the moment? Does any character just seem like yucky charms? When Brawl came out, Link, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf and a few others were immediately viewed as darn near useless. They aren't but boy did they have an uphill battle to win things.

I finally played my brother yesterday and for about 30-40 matches he beat me silly with MegaMan. He was just using that shield in ways that really disrupted me. I was very surprised.

Bowser is still looking like a beast falcon is good mario is good greninja looks good. Dk looks solid as does fox.

 

[theprodigy]

What, why did you assume I was talking about you? There have been posters like in GFaqs saying that rage prevents combos due to high knockback, forgetting other attacks exist. My post was a blanket statement about complainers.

why are you running to gamefaqs to find something to complain about

 

[StayDead]

That game went a bit better for me Joe.

 

[Timeaisis]

What are the general thoughts on characters? Do any really stand out at the moment? Does any character just seem like yucky charms? When Brawl came out, Link, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf and a few others were immediately viewed as darn near useless. They aren't but boy did they have an uphill battle to win things.

I finally played my brother yesterday and for about 30-40 matches he beat me silly with MegaMan. He was just using that shield in ways that really disrupted me. I was very surprised.

There hasn't really been any stinkers yet. The characters seem to be much more balanced than in Brawl, which is pretty impressive considering there are 49 of them. It's too early to tell who's the best, though.

 

[Formless]

What are the general thoughts on characters? Do any really stand out at the moment? Does any character just seem like yucky charms? When Brawl came out, Link, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf and a few others were immediately viewed as darn near useless. They aren't but boy did they have an uphill battle to win things.

I finally played my brother yesterday and for about 30-40 matches he beat me silly with MegaMan. He was just using that shield in ways that really disrupted me. I was very surprised.

There's been some initial fears because some characters have a different emphasis this time (Falco's air moves aren't as strong but his ground moves are arguably better, perhaps the same with Marth etc). I don't see anyone saying a particular character is trash, and some are much improved (notably some of the heavies)

 

[Hatchtag]

What are the general thoughts on characters? Do any really stand out at the moment? Does any character just seem like yucky charms? When Brawl came out, Link, Captain Falcon, Ganondorf and a few others were immediately viewed as darn near useless. They aren't but boy did they have an uphill battle to win things.

I finally played my brother yesterday and for about 30-40 matches he beat me silly with MegaMan. He was just using that shield in ways that really disrupted me. I was very surprised.

No one's looking too bad/too good so far, but Megaman, Shulk, and Little Mac seem to have a lot of problems doing well in matches. But it's too early to tell if that's because of a learning curve or because they just suck.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Just gonna repost this again. I noticed this a long time ago but didnt comment on it until the 12th of September.

I didn't know what I was seeing was a combination of the below and VI/rage effect. Now it all makes even more sense and honestly has me even more worried than before.

For new page don't kill me:

Three things are turning me off. Im still hyped as ever but:

Damage + knockback seem to be significantly reduced - the effects (plus hitstun) make it seem like attacks are doing an incredible amount of damage and are super powerful but in reality damage has been toned down compared to previous games.

New ledge mechanic - the new ledge mechanic has the potential to totally change the game, and not in a good way. Sakurai effectively removed passive K.O.s By that I mean K.O'ing an opponent when you actually don't have to do anything except stop their movement/recovery. Passive K.O.'s added variety and depth to the game. With their removal the game is not as interesting. I don't know why he changed it.

K.O. Bounding box - This in addition to the first point means that matches last longer and seem to be less interesting. I suspect that 2 stock matches will probably become standard unless the competitive community decides to raise the damage ratio for each match. Nobody wants to watch a match where the majority of play is a person being knocked far off stage only to recover and the cycle to continue again ... and again .... and again ... and again. It's boring. At that point it's not trading blows. It's trading one blow ... every 20 seconds. Someone needs to die for their mistakes and this game is way too forgiving. My brother baired someone at 200% and they didnt die.

I know everyone is hype right now and I'm not trying to deflate that but remember when Brawl came out and people were super hype about it? It took a long time for the denial to wear off. I suspect that the increased KO box/decreased damage and ledge mechanics will be the new tripping. It's just antithetical to competitive play and seems to echo Nintendo's mantra that everyone is a winner and deserves infinite tries to get there. All the new gameplay mechanics lend themselves to casual "retries". Are you not that good at smash? Well lets lower the damage so you can last longer. Are you not that good at Smash? Well let's increase the Ko box so you can last longer. Are you not that good at Smash? Well let's make it so that anyone can grab the ledge at anytime so that you can last longer!

If you guys haven't noticed Sakurai is really doing his darndest to make things as even as possible even when that means making things incredibly uneven and uncompetitive.

 

[udivision]

siglemic is practicing with techs in Melee if you want to see the kind of depth and speed that Melee has.

I'm enjoying the Smash 4 demo so far and it's def going to be a ton better than Brawl competitively, but I hope it grows as complex as Melee in the long run, even if it plays very differently.

I think custom moves could help in that department.
Also, something like the "All-Star Mode" that P:M is going to implement could be cool in the Wii U version. Using multiple characters in a match could add to that complexity/depth.

 

[chaosblade]

Lower the stock then...there's so many ways to shorten/cap matches

Long matches are fine when I'm playing. Boring play is not though. Sitting around waiting for the opponent to get back within range would qualify as "boring play." Project M already suffers from this to an extent since most characters have good/improved recovery (kills can take forever on Dreamland 64!). Smash 4 is even worse about it just based on the demo and videos I've watched.

 

[Guesong]

There is a feeling that it's too early to judge things, but some of these mechanics only seem to have one outcome which makes these judgments understandable.

Personally, "advanced techniques" never come into play when I play with my bros and we have a lot of fun.

But when I watch Evo or Apex, or whatever random tournament, I don't watch to see people play who are only as good as I am (as in, not very). I want to see the people play that are actually affected by, discover, use/abuse these mechanics because high level play is amazing.

I'm not a part the competitive community, but I feel like those of us who aren't should let them hammer it out without feeling a need to pass judgments on them.

Goal line technology may not effect your pick-up soccer games so it may seem ridiculous for people to fuss over it, but I'm not watching your pick-up soccer games I'm watching the World Cup.

I agree with this for the most part.

Personally though, while I respect JediLink and JoeInky and other competitive admirers of Smash of this board, I'm honestly getting annoyed. Not at them, mind you. And in no way would I want them to go away and I like to listen to their opinions.

However, the whole negativity the small competitive scene has is getting tiresome. In no way am I judging if they are right or not to be negative about their own vision of the game, but if a stranger would come into this thread and read everything with no knowledge prior, he'd come out with the impression that Sakurai failed this game, failed his fans, that Nintendo is out of touch and that they don't know how to make games anymore.

Smash is my favorite game series. Full of nostalgia, awesome music, and fun to be had with friends. Been playing Brawl for a long time now, and I'm really excited to finally see Smash in HD with my friends and with a robust online code. The gameplay is a definitive improvement over Brawl, the newcomers are for the most part well thought-out and interesting, the custom moves offer a lot of diversity in this 51-moveset cast and I'm really excited to be playing only the 4th (I count 3DS and WiiU version as one, sorry Sakurai) itineration of this franchise after 15 years of existence.

But every time I read this thread, there's always something. "Oh, the blast zones. They are way too big." "Final Destination only? Meh." "Listen guys, we found out about Vectoring and this is gonna be big, man I don't feel this game anymore." "Man, fuck these airdodges".

It's just...idk. I know Heath was against the idea of a "For Fun!" and "For Glory!" threads, but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be for the best.

 

[PadWarrior]

No one's looking too bad/too good so far, but Megaman, Shulk, and Little Mac seem to have a lot of problems doing well in matches. But it's too early to tell if that's because of a learning curve or because they just suck.

I've seen some good mega mans on YouTube and streams. He's not your typical smash fighter

 

[JoeInky]

I'm going to go on record and say that I agree with most of Sakurai's mechanic design decisions so far.

Not designing around competitive play does not imply bad game design. And good game design does not imply designing around competitive play. This is shaping up to be the most accessible, most intuitive, and most balanced Smash game yet, and I'm really excited to get my hands on it.

Being able to strike a balance between offense and defense as well as constructing proper risk-reward mechanics does mean you're designing around competitive play, it just means you're designing a well thought out game.

Smash 4 is not well thought out in places. VI might be an intuitive concept, but the implementation is bad.

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

I agree with this for the most part.

Personally though, while I respect JediLink and JoeInky and other competitive admirers of Smash of this board, I'm honestly getting annoyed. Not at them, mind you. And in no way would I want them to go away and I like to listen to their opinions.

However, the whole negativity the small competitive scene has is getting tiresome. In no way am I judging if they are right or not to be negative about their own vision of the game, but if a stranger would come into this thread and read everything with no knowledge prior, he'd come out with the impression that Sakurai failed this game, failed his fans, that Nintendo is out of touch and that they don't know how to make games anymore.

Smash is my favorite game series. Full of nostalgia, awesome music, and fun to be had with friends. Been playing Brawl for a long time now, and I'm really excited to finally see Smash in HD with my friends and with a robust online code. The gameplay is a definitive improvement over Brawl, the newcomers are for the most part well thought-out and interesting, the custom moves offer a lot of diversity in this 51-moveset cast and I'm really excited to be playing only the 4th (I count 3DS and WiiU version as one, sorry Sakurai) itineration of this franchise after 15 years of existence.

But every time I read this thread, there's always something. "Oh, the blast zones. They are way too big." "Final Destination only? Meh." "Listen guys, we found out about Vectoring and this is gonna be big, man I don't feel this game anymore." "Man, fuck these airdodges".

It's just...idk. I know Heath was against the idea of a "For Fun!" and "For Glory!" threads, but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be for the best.

It's a discussion forum. Everyone doesn't have to bend to your will or opinion. And other people's perception of Smash and whether it's a successful game shouldn't affect your happiness or comfortability. Who cares if someone comes in here and reads a post out of context? You're not Nintendo's PR department so you shouldn't be worried about that. People are having legitimate complaints and concerns. People that love Smash and Nintendo just as much as you

 

[chaosblade]

I agree with this for the most part.

Personally though, while I respect JediLink and JoeInky and other competitive admirers of Smash of this board, I'm honestly getting annoyed. Not at them, mind you. And in no way would I want them to go away and I like to listen to their opinions.

However, the whole negativity the small competitive scene has is getting tiresome. In no way am I judging if they are right or not to be negative about their own vision of the game, but if a stranger would come into this thread and read everything with no knowledge prior, he'd come out with the impression that Sakurai failed this game, failed his fans, that Nintendo is out of touch and that they don't know how to make games anymore.

Smash is my favorite game series. Full of nostalgia, awesome music, and fun to be had with friends. Been playing Brawl for a long time now, and I'm really excited to finally see Smash in HD with my friends and with a robust online code. The gameplay is a definitive improvement over Brawl, the newcomers are for the most part well thought-out and interesting, the custom moves offer a lot of diversity in this 51-moveset cast and I'm really excited to be playing only the 4th (I count 3DS and WiiU version as one, sorry Sakurai) itineration of this franchise after 15 years of existence.

But every time I read this thread, there's always something. "Oh, the blast zones. They are way too big." "Final Destination only? Meh." "Listen guys, we found out about Vectoring and this is gonna be big, man I don't feel this game anymore." "Man, fuck these airdodges".

It's just...idk. I know Heath was against the idea of a "For Fun!" and "For Glory!" threads, but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be for the best.

I think you're overreacting, people complain because they care, and because they hope their criticisms are seen and the game becomes better for it. Look at Mario Kart 8, Nintendo fixed most of the biggest complaints about the game.

 

[Timeaisis]

Being able to strike a balance between offense and defense as well as constructing proper risk-reward mechanics does mean you're designing around competitive play, it just means you're designing a well thought out game.

Smash 4 is not well thought out in places. VI might be an intuitive concept, but the implementation is bad.

Bad for whom? If we're talking about the end user here, it doesn't seem bad at all. Maybe bad to the subset of competitive players. That is my point. The game is designed for general audiences in mind, with a layer of complexity underneath for competitive players to discover.

I think it strikes a good balance between both. But just because something isn't implemented with competitive gaming in mind doesn't imply it's poorly designed -- I think VI will be a lot more intuitive and fun for regular Smash players, which is clearly Sakurai's goal.

 

[StayDead]

I'll play one more Joe, then I've gotta go for a bit.

 

[Boss Doggie]

why are you running to gamefaqs to find something to complain about

Hey now, I like to browse other sites too

 

[JediLink]

Not designing around competitive play does not imply bad game design. And good game design does not imply designing around competitive play.

Not designing around competitive play is fine... if the game is not a competitive game. The objective of Smash is to KO your opponents while avoiding other players trying to do the same to you, and at the end of the round, the game will say "The winner is [character]!" Smash is a competitive game, of course it should be designed around competitive play.

I'd argue that the best competitive game is one that's fun and rewarding for all skill levels. This, above all else, has Sakurai's goal ever since 1999.

 

[trixx]

Being able to strike a balance between offense and defense as well as constructing proper risk-reward mechanics does mean you're designing around competitive play, it just means you're designing a well thought out game.

Smash 4 is not well thought out in places. VI might be an intuitive concept, but the implementation is bad.

Let's wait a bit before we reach that conclusion. If you could actually get out of most combos even low percent ones due to VI/hitstun shuffle I can't say that I'd be in favour of it, but who knows. Also it would just mean that combos would be harder to pull off because timing, accuracy and your overall creativity to chain attacks would need to be a lot higher.

No matter what this game will be fun, just wouldn't want it to be filled with poking.

 

[Revven]

It's just...idk. I know Heath was against the idea of a "For Fun!" and "For Glory!" threads, but sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be for the best.

It wouldn't work because there would be far less posters in the more competitive thread. Separation is also bad in general, IMO.

 

[AdaWong]

Hahaha true that. Well as long as no character can be exploited like Metaknight, Diddy, Ice Climbers or Snake and as long as there is no immediate hit stun canceling and as long as there are no guaranteed or infinite chain grabs and as long as there is no tripping this game will undoubtedly be competitive in my hands for years to come.

I heard about the ZSS infinite, is it only on Robin? I fully expect that to get patched out. ZSS though was the character I feared most in Brawl. Mainly because of who I chose but that paralyzer is so hard for me to get around. I feel like she is going to be top tier for sure. Any tips on getting around her reach and specifically the paralyzer?

You can't. Once you face a ZSS, might as well SD.

 

[PadWarrior]

Any word when wave 2 of the amiibos are due?

 

[Foxy Fox 39]

Not designing around competitive play is fine... if the game is not a competitive game. The objective of Smash is to KO your opponents while avoiding other players trying to do the same to you, and at the end of the round, the game will say "The winner is [character]!" Smash is a competitive game, of course it should be designed around competitive play.

I'd argue that the best competitive game is one that's fun and rewarding for all skill levels. This, above all else, has Sakurai's goal ever since 1999.

I agree except that last line. Sakurai has shown us his goal is to make the skill floor as low as possible and have the ceiling as low as possible as well - which is antithetical to competitive play.

 

[Timeaisis]

Not designing around competitive play is fine... if the game is not a competitive game. The objective of Smash is to KO your opponents while avoiding other players trying to do the same to you, and at the end of the round, the game will say "The winner is [character]!" Smash is a competitive game, of course it should be designed around competitive play.

I'd argue that the best competitive game is one that's fun and rewarding for all skill levels. This, above all else, has Sakurai's goal ever since 1999.

Well, we're arguing semantics here now. Any head-to-head multiplayer game by definition is competitive. What I mean by "competitive" in my above post refers to the style of gameplay that takes place in the "professional scene". I can still be competitive on my couch with my friends without being aware of the nuanced mechanics of Smash, for example. It's still competitive. But what I meant in regards to not designing around competitive play was that it's not being designed with the professional competitive scene in mind. Of course, any fighting game is competitive and has to balance those things.

 

[Beats]

At the moment, I don't really like VI/KBI and that's mostly because of how strong of a survival mechanic it is. I like the concept, but it just seems excessive from a combat design standpoint.

The game already has some good defensive options with shielding and spot/roll/air dodging. Recoveries seem better across the board too and you don't have to worry about the opponent ledge hogging you. I don't see why VI/KBI is necessary on top of all of this. It also irks me that it doesn't seem to be explained to the player in game and it's not something that's obvious while playing.

Personally I don't like that one of the ways you can KO an opponent is now much less effective.

 

[StayDead]

I swear Ness' hitbox on his forward air is way bigger than ever before. You can hit me charging anything quite far back from the ledge.

ggs.

 

[PadWarrior]

Well, we're arguing semantics here now. Any head-to-head multiplayer game by definition is competitive. What I mean by "competitive" in my above post refers to the style of gameplay that takes place in the "professional scene". I can still be competitive on my couch with my friends without being aware of the nuanced mechanics of Smash, for example. It's still competitive. But what I meant in regards to not designing around competitive play was that it's not being designed with the professional competitive scene in mind. Of course, any fighting game is competitive and has to balance those things.

"Professionals" are hardcore. Anyone who plays smash and wants to win is competitive I agree.

 

[thecouncil]

Finally got to try the demo. It looks so awesome in person. No wonder the 3DS is pushed to the limit, it really shows.

And a big exasperated sigh at my muscle memory because this button layout does not feel right at all when I'm used to Smashing on a GameCube controller. And since it's the demo, no button rebinding for me. Any tips to unlearning this?

tip: play it a lot. the controls felt odd to me too after the first few matches, but i just got used to them.

 

[munchie64]

Just gonna repost this again. I noticed this a long time ago but didnt comment on it until the 12th of September.

I didn't know what I was seeing was a combination of the below and VI/rage effect. Now it all makes even more sense and honestly has me even more worried than before.

If you guys haven't noticed Sakurai is really doing his darndest to make things as even as possible even when that means making things incredibly uneven and uncompetitive.

I understand your problems, but your original post made me lol. It's a bit fear-mongery

 

[johnsavage]

tip: play it a lot. the controls felt odd to me too after the first few matches, but i just got used to them.

This. It felt awkward to reach the L and R buttons and I kept confusing the jumps with the attacks, but now it feels natural. It's such an awesome game. I can't wait for October 3rd.

 

[tonyh24613]

After playing survey in JP Nintendo Club is up, 10 points.

 

[JoeInky]

I feel like VI is inherently bad design because of the fact that it needlessly increases the defensive options in a game that is already heavily in favour of defense, rather than working towards a balance.

I would have preferred they kept DI and just increased the influence over the trajectory you have.


Also, if I'm reading this right, if a gameplay mechanic is poorly designed, but you don't notice it because you're not interested in the subtleties of the game, then it isn't poorly designed anymore? Is that what you're saying here Timeaisis?

Most of the changes I'd want just seem like common sense to me from a design perspective, I mean, no momentum-conservation in a physics-based platform fighter? What's that all about? The movement in this game feels really stiff because of this.

 

[JediLink]

I agree except that last line. Sakurai has shown us his goal is to make the skill floor as low as possible and have the ceiling as low as possible as well - which is antithetical to competitive play.

Sakurai just doesn't know what he wants, really. His decisions are inconsistent with themselves. He wants to decrease the skill gap, and yet there's a mode with skill-based matchmaking called "For Glory"?